Procore MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation ('Show') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's safe, requires specific permissions, returns paginated results, or has rate limits. The mention of 'GET' hints at a read-only HTTP method, but this is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise (one sentence) but under-specified. It front-loads the purpose but wastes space on the API endpoint ('GET /rest/v1.1/change_events/new'), which doesn't help an AI agent. It could be more structured with additional context.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a vague purpose, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'new' means, the return format, or behavioral context. For a tool with four parameters and likely complex data, this leaves significant gaps for an agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the four parameters (project_id, selected_origin_id, page, per_page). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema, but the baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high, as it compensates adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Show new Change Event. [Construction Financials/Change Events] GET /rest/v1.1/change_events/new' is vague. It restates the tool name ('Show new Change Event') and adds an API endpoint, but doesn't specify what 'new' means (e.g., recently created, pending, or a specific status). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'Construction Financials/Change Events' but lacks a clear verb+resource definition.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention any prerequisites, context, or sibling tools (like 'list_change_events_v1_1' or 'show_change_event_v1_1') for comparison. It's a bare statement with no usage instructions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.